按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
mands。 But how freedom is possible； and how we are to conceive this kind of causality theoretically and positively； is not thereby discovered； but only that there is such a causality is postulated by the moral law and in its behoof。 It is the same with the remaining ideas； the possibility of which no human intelligence will ever fathom； but the truth of which； on the other hand； no sophistry will ever wrest from the conviction even of the commonest man。
VII。 How is it possible to conceive an Extension of Pure Reason in a Practical point of view； without its Knowledge as Speculative being enlarged at the same time？
In order not to be too abstract； we will answer this question at once in its application to the present case。 In order to extend a pure cognition practically； there must be an a priori purpose given； that is； an end as object （of the will）； which independently of all theological principle is presented as practically necessary by an imperative which determines the will directly （a categorical imperative）； and in this case that is the summum bonum。 This； however； is not possible without presupposing three theoretical conceptions （for which； because they are mere conceptions of pure reason； no corresponding intuition can be found； nor consequently by the path of theory any objective reality）； namely； freedom； immortality； and God。 Thus by the practical law which commands the existence of the highest good possible in a world； the possibility of those objects of pure speculative reason is postulated； and the objective reality which the latter could not assure them。 By this the theoretical knowledge of pure reason does indeed obtain an accession； but it consists only in this； that those concepts which otherwise it had to look upon as problematical （merely thinkable） concepts； are now shown assertorially to be such as actually have objects； because practical reason indispensably requires their existence for the possibility of its object； the summum bonum； which practically is absolutely necessary； and this justifies theoretical reason in assuming them。 But this extension of theoretical reason is no extension of speculative； that is； we cannot make any positive use of it in a theoretical point of view。 For as nothing is accomplished in this by practical reason； further than that these concepts are real and actually have their （possible） objects； and nothing in the way of intuition of them is given thereby （which indeed could not be demanded）； hence the admission of this reality does not render any synthetical proposition possible。 Consequently； this discovery does not in the least help us to extend this knowledge of ours in a speculative point of view； although it does in respect of the practical employment of pure reason。 The above three ideas of speculative reason are still in themselves not cognitions； they are however （transcendent） thoughts； in which there is nothing impossible。 Now； by help of an apodeictic practical law； being necessary conditions of that which it commands to be made an object； they acquire objective reality； that is； we learn from it that they have objects； without being able to point out how the conception of them is related to an object； and this； too； is still not a cognition of these objects； for we cannot thereby form any synthetical judgement about them； nor determine their application theoretically； consequently； we can make no theoretical rational use of them at all； in which use all speculative knowledge of reason consists。 Nevertheless； the theoretical knowledge； not indeed of these objects； but of reason generally； is so far enlarged by this； that by the practical postulates objects were given to those ideas； a merely problematical thought having by this means first acquired objective reality。 There is therefore no extension of the knowledge of given supersensible objects； but an extension of theoretical reason and of its knowledge in respect of the supersensible generally； inasmuch as it is compelled to admit that there are such objects； although it is not able to define them more closely； so as itself to extend this knowledge of the objects （which have now been given it on practical grounds； and only for practical use）。 For this accession； then； pure theoretical reason； for which all those ideas are transcendent and without object； has simply to thank its practical faculty。 In this they become immanent and constitutive； being the source of the possibility of realizing the necessary object of pure practical reason （the summum bonum）； whereas apart from this they are transcendent； and merely regulative principles of speculative reason； which do not require it to assume a new object beyond experience； but only to bring its use in experience nearer to completeness。 But when once reason is in possession of this accession； it will go to work with these ideas as speculative reason （properly only to assure the certainty of its practical use） in a negative manner： that is； not extending but clearing up its knowledge so as on one side to keep off anthropomorphism； as the source of superstition； or seeming extension of these conceptions by supposed experience； and on the other side fanaticism； which promises the same by means of supersensible intuition or feelings of the like kind。 All these are hindrances to the practical use of pure reason； so that the removal of them may certainly be considered an extension of our knowledge in a practical point of view； without contradicting the admission that for speculative purposes reason has not in the least gained by this。 Every employment of reason in respect of an object requires pure concepts of the understanding （categories）； without which no object can be conceived。 These can be applied to the theoretical employment of reason； i。e。； to that kind of knowledge； only in case an intuition （which is always sensible） is taken as a basis； and therefore merely in order to conceive by means of… them an object of possible experience。 Now here what have to be thought by means of the categories in order to be known are ideas of reason； which cannot be given in any experience。 Only we are not here concerned with the theoretical knowledge of the objects of these ideas； but only with this； whether they have objects at all。 This reality is supplied by pure practical reason； and theoretical reason has nothing further to do in this but to think those objects by means of categories。 This； as we have elsewhere clearly shown； can be done well enough without needing any intuition （either sensible or supersensible） because the categories have their seat and origin in the pure understanding； simply as the faculty of thought； before and independently of any intuition； and they always only signify an object in general； no matter in what way it may be given to us。 Now when the categories are to be applied to these ideas； it is not possible to give them any object in intuition； but that such an object actually exists； and consequently that the category as a mere form of thought is here not empty but has significance； this is sufficiently assured them by an object which practical reason presents beyond doubt in the concept of the summ